Do you want to discuss boring politics? (49 Viewers)

[Skybluekyle]

They haven't gone to the polls other than Blair for any Labour PM since Harold Wilson

In fairness, the British people have never gone to the polls to elect a Prime Minister, as the position of PM is an appointed position by the Monarch. The PM must keep the confidence of the House of Commons, as per the constitutional principle set down within the Bill of Rights 1689, Parliament is sovereign, but then the power is given back to the people as the people in the House of Commons are elected by the electorate via a General Election.

Guess that is the drawback of living in a Parliamentary system, but I would probably prefer that over living under a US constitution that can be interpreted by judges with their own political biases appointed by political figures, that requires supermajorities for amendments.

 

---

[David O'Day]

In the meantime interest of balance a good news Labour story broke this morning but is probably being drowned out by the Elphicke story.

Labour has promised Unions that it will outlaw fire and hire. Along with the commitment to repeal the Tories minimum service level bill (yay for Brexit) some improvements in workers rights are on the way under a labour government. Within the first 100 days apparently.

That's been the policy and plans for a while now.

 

[SBT]

What would Labour have lost by telling Elphicke to get fucked?

The opportunity to poke Sunak in the eye, and the chance to reach out to a type of voter who typically wouldn’t consider voting for Labour.

I personally doubt it will end up being worth it, but if you think the above is more valuable to you than whatever reputational fallout you’ll suffer, then there’s an obvious case for doing it.

 

[David O'Day]

For those “let’s win Tories over” people. Can I please ask where the limit is?

Would you take Reece-Mogg? Would a Tommy Robinson endorsement be ok?

I get winning over undecideds and doing damage to your rivals but surely there is a limit to what you take without abandoning your principles.

The limit I guess would be when you have convinced enough people who voted for them to vote for you that you win an election.

Politics is as you have been alluding like football and more specifically the FA cup. You get fuck all for not winning

 

[fernandopartridge]

The opportunity to poke Sunak in the eye, and the chance to reach out to a type of voter who typically wouldn’t consider voting for Labour.

I personally doubt it will end up being worth it, but if you think the above is more valuable to you than whatever reputational fallout you’ll suffer, then there’s an obvious case for doing it.

Sunak is unpopular - nobody really cares if he's being 'poked in the eye'. Are there people in Dover or elsewhere who voted specifically for or would vote specifically for Natalie Elphicke rather than the Conservative party then?

 

[skybluetony176]

For anyone who is yet to twig why Elphicke is own goal



Labour should have been talking about how they’re 30 points ahead in the latest poll today. Tories should be explaining why they’re 30 points behind. Labour should be talking about their policy announcement today on the commitment to ban hire and fire. Instead they’ve created a vacuum where the only thing they can talk about is why they welcomed with open arms a far right Tory her own constituents wouldn’t trust as far as they could throw her. A complete own goal. Sunak has probably phoned Starmer to thank him.

 

[wingy]

Course it is. That’s why you can’t rebut it.

Ice cream and waffles Mmm sounds delicious!!

 

[skybluetony176]

That's been the policy and plans for a while now.

In which case they’ve re announced/re committed to it today to reassure unions who were worried that Labour were planning to water down plans to restore workers rights lost under the Tories. Either way it should have been a talking point on the media rounds, it wasn’t because of the Elphicke vacuum they’ve created.

 

[duffer]

For anyone who is yet to twig why Elphicke is own goal



Labour should have been talking about how they’re 30 points ahead in the latest poll today. Tories should be explaining why they’re 30 points behind. Labour should be talking about their policy announcement today on the commitment to ban hire and fire. Instead they’ve created a vacuum where the only thing they can talk about is why they welcomed with open arms a far right Tory her own constituents wouldn’t trust as far as they could throw her. A complete own goal. Sunak has probably phoned Starmer to thank him.

In fairness, the unions don't seem entirely convinced that Starmer isn't already backtracking on the workers' rights thing. Maybe he'd rather people weren't talking about it.

Whenever I hear a Starmer "pledge", I find myself thinking of the Pirates' Code...

Labour vows to ban fire and rehire after war of words with unions

Exclusive: plans revealed in new leaked dossier sent to unions ahead of crunch meeting with Keir Starmer

www.theguardian.com

 

[wingy]

A poke at Reform?

 

[Grendel]

The opportunity to poke Sunak in the eye, and the chance to reach out to a type of voter who typically wouldn’t consider voting for Labour.

I personally doubt it will end up being worth it, but if you think the above is more valuable to you than whatever reputational fallout you’ll suffer, then there’s an obvious case for doing it.

A lot of hard core working classes with anti immigration views have always voted Labour - the “red wall” collapsed as Corbyn - ironically given his anti Eu stance - fudged it and threatened a second referendum.

Dover is defined as the poorest area in Kent

 

[chiefdave]

Struggle to see the positives in admitting someone to the party who has to issue an apology on their first full day on the job

Natalie Elphicke apologises for comments about ex-husband's victims

Some Labour MPs have raised concerns about the comments after the Dover MP defected to the party.

www.bbc.co.uk

Not sure there's a significant amount of people who have zero interest in politics yet would have registered, and acted on, her defection but won't see the negative headlines and social media posts

 

[SBT]

Sunak is unpopular - nobody really cares if he's being 'poked in the eye'. Are there people in Dover or elsewhere who voted specifically for or would vote specifically for Natalie Elphicke rather than the Conservative party then?

Tbh I think poking him in the eye is probably one of the biggest motivating factors for swing voters right now

 

[shmmeee]

It was in her articles she used to scribe for the Morning Star - sorry I mean the Daily Express

Yes because the Sun and CCHQ made it up and tried to make it a thing. She was being paid to take the party line, you for some reason are doing it for free.

 

[Grendel]

Yes because the Sun and CCHQ made it up and tried to make it a thing. She was being paid to take the party line, you for some reason are doing it for free.

So she was secretly a Labour activist but paid to write something she - given her obvious left wing credentials - felt obliged to write.

Thanks it’s making total sense now.

 

[PVA]

Sir Softie certainly isn't on the same level as Sir Beer Korma, or Sir Kid Starver.

Standards are slipping

 

[Grendel]

Sir Softie certainly isn't on the same level as Sir Beer Korma, or Sir Kid Starver.

Standards are slipping

Well maybe or maybe not but the last I saw Boris Johnson has not joined Labour. I’m sure if he was up for it he’d be there - hey that’s great politics right? (Well there is no left anymore)

 

[skybluetony176]

I see Bill Cash had an interview to join Labour this afternoon

 

[PVA]

Well maybe or maybe not but the last I saw Boris Johnson has not joined Labour. I’m sure if he was up for it he’d be there - hey that’s great politics right? (Well there is no left anymore)

Erm. OK?

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Sir Softie certainly isn't on the same level as Sir Beer Korma, or Sir Kid Starver.

Standards are slipping

I preferred Sir Smarmer

 

[Ian1779]

Another masterstroke from those very clever political bigwigs at Labour.

 

[duffer]

Struggle to see the positives in admitting someone to the party who has to issue an apology on their first full day on the job

Natalie Elphicke apologises for comments about ex-husband's victims

Some Labour MPs have raised concerns about the comments after the Dover MP defected to the party.

www.bbc.co.uk

Not sure there's a significant amount of people who have zero interest in politics yet would have registered, and acted on, her defection but won't see the negative headlines and social media posts

I trust she'll now have the whip suspended (oo-err missus) for a year whilst an "independent" enquiry determines whether the apology meets party standards.

 

[Grendel]

Erm. OK?

I assume if Mr Johnson agreed to work with Mr Starmer you’d be ok with that?

 

[SBT]

Rumours of the political left’s demise may have been greatly exaggerated

 

[Grendel]

Rumours of the political left’s demise may have been greatly exaggerated

There is no left anymore

 

[SBT]

Wow RIP leftism. You had a fairly average run, you are with da angles now

 

[Grendel]

Wow RIP leftism. You had a fairly average run, you are with da angles now

There is no longer a party that has any socialist credentials at all. It’s inconceivable that the likes of Kinnock would have allowed the modern day equivalent of Edwina currie into its parliament- it’s a total joke

 

[Grendel]

We are talking about the most left wing Labour leader bar Corbyn since Foot here.

 

[JAM See]

It wasn’t until recently people like me were encouraged to vote. I’d rather have a vote in the country I actually pay tax in than vote for Tory or Tory lite, thanks.

Yawn.

("I'm too lazy to vote, but find time for the socials").

 

[JAM See]

It's already pretty much a managed democracy without mandatory voting. Can you imagine what it would be like if given a veneer of credibility by having people forced to vote for any of the utter fucking cunts seeking election?

Yawn.

("I'm too lazy to vote, but find time for the socials").

Quote Reply

 

[Grendel]

Yawn.

("I'm too lazy to vote, but find time for the socials").

Im not voting it’s pointless and politics needs to change

 

[jimmyhillsfanclub]

@JAM See You're clearly very passionate about this. what is your opinion on officially spoiling your vote?

I did ask you earlier in this thread (which prompted brief debate...see below) but you may have been on your hols....

Do you want to discuss boring politics?

I’ve said I’m not voting or will for a fringe party - probably the Greens Vote green for reform

www.skybluestalk.co.uk

 

[JAM See]

@JAM See You're clearly very passionate about this. what is your opinion on officially spoiling your vote?

I did ask you earlier in this thread (which prompted brief debate...see below) but you may have been on your hols....

Do you want to discuss boring politics?

I’ve said I’m not voting or will for a fringe party - probably the Greens Vote green for reform

www.skybluestalk.co.uk

Thanks for tracking back @jimmyhillsfanclub

I was en route to NYC for a lash for Paddy's day on the 14th March so didn't catch up on the chat for a bit.

I'm very much in favour of compulsory voting, if that includes "None of the above" or going nuclear and spoiling your ballot paper, then that's fine, at least you are honouring the men and women who fought for your right to spoil the ballot.

You're right, I do passionately believe in the franchise that our forebears fought for.

It breaks my heart that some of the intelligent, erudite posters on here choose to turn their back on the only method we, the proletariat, have of effecting change.

Let's be honest, revolution is not going to happen. Voting is our only voice.

Yet some choose not to participate. Baffles me.

 

[fernandopartridge]

Yawn.

("I'm too lazy to vote, but find time for the socials").

Quote Reply

You can postal vote these days

 

[fernandopartridge]

Thanks for tracking back @jimmyhillsfanclub

I was en route to NYC for a lash for Paddy's day on the 14th March so didn't catch up on the chat for a bit.

I'm very much in favour of compulsory voting, if that includes "None of the above" or going nuclear and spoiling your ballot paper, then that's fine, at least you are honouring the men and women who fought for your right to spoil the ballot.

You're right, I do passionately believe in the franchise that our forebears fought for.

It breaks my heart that some of the intelligent, erudite posters on here choose to turn their back on the only method we, the proletariat, have of effecting change.

Let's be honest, revolution is not going to happen. Voting is our only voice.

Yet some choose not to participate. Baffles me.

Perhaps you're misunderstanding what I meant by not voting